Household formation,affordability, and housing policy

Over the past several decades, in Canada as elsewhere, governments have sought to provide decent, affordable housing for every household. However, viewed in aggregate, the size and extent of the affordability problem in Canada may well have worsened. This paper argues that changes in housing affordability are linked to the changing pace and character of household formation and that household formation has been responsive to a variety of public policies generally, and to housing programs in particular. Over the last four decades or so, changes in household formation have reflected policy inducements, price movements and income growth, and the substantial elasticity of demand for separate living arrangements. Even worsening indicators of affordability may actually indicate the success of modern housing policy, although this raises questions about the appropriateness of the measures, about the goals of housing programs, and about the ultimate costs of eliminating the affordability problem.     

Exploring an analytic model of urban housing strata

An analytic model of urban housing strata is developed which utilizes housing structure type, housing tenure type, floor size, physical quality, residential area, and number of rooms to calculate a housing deficit for each housing characteristic. The housing norm is subtracted from the actual housing conditions. Each housing deficit value is weighted according to the priority of the 6 variables and then summed as the housing strata score. Negative scores are below the norm and positive ones above. The model is applied to empirical data for Seoul, Korea. The findings were that 66% of the family sample showed negative scores (unsatisfactory housing conditions). Scores range from -22 to =or+ 18. Morris and Winter's "housing adjustment model" is used to explain housing behavior when there is a gap between housing conditions and the norm. Housing behavior is analyzed with multiple regression analysis of housing strata, social strata, and family life stage variables. Findings indicate that the establishment stage in the family life cycle is more likely to be associated with upper housing strata. From the way the model is set up only those in the establishment, childbearing, and child-rearing stage could get a positive deficit housing score. Size of household is not statistically significant, but upper housing strata are reflective of families with 2.5 members. Those with 3-4.5 members may be in the upper middle housing strata. Those with 5 children are in the lower middle housing strata. Housing strata are significantly related to housing structure type, tenure type, and size and number of rooms. The high rise apartment is likely to be in the upper, the row house and multifamily house in the lower housing, and the single detached house is distributed through all 4 strata. Home ownership is highest in the upper strata. The proportion of housing with 18 pyong and 2 rooms is higher in the lower strata, while housing with 19-32 pyong (63-106 sq. ms) and 3 rooms is higher in the middle housing strata. Housing satisfaction is significantly explained by housing strata but not general social strata (r = .13). Propensity to move is explained by family life stage followed by housing strata.     

Evaluating indicators for housing policy: Residential satisfaction vs marginal improvement priorities

The research challenges the conventional usage of households' residential satisfaction as a guide for housing policy and development. A new housing indicator, ‘marginal residential improvement priority’, is introduced and is compared with residential satisfaction both theoretically and empirically. Within the context of neoclassical consumer theory it is shown that the former provides a superior indicator of households' housing preferences than the latter. It is then demonstrated empirically that these conceptual distinctions make for significant differences when the indicators are employed in a practical application. Using a sample of 971 households drawn from Wooster, Ohio, the paper considers their evaluations of four general dimensions of the residential environment and six specific features of the dwelling. Zero-order correlations between the indicators average only 0.40 across these ten dimensions. Households' relative satisfaction with these various aspects diverge substantially from the priority they place on improving these aspects in the future, with rank-order correlations not differing significantly from zero. More specifically, all household strata gave public services their lowest improvement priority and dwelling quality their highest, regardless of their relative degree of satisfaction with the dimension. Similarly, most groups gave high priority to improving interior condition and room size and low priority to improving exterior condition, independent of their satisfaction. Thus, if the efficacy of a limited amount of resources invested in a housing policy is to be maximized, they should not necessarily be directed toward those features of the residential environment with which households are least satisfied.     

Population and housing

The analysis described here was carried out in response to a political crisis in Australia. In 1994, a Member of Parliament who opposed the use of foreign aid funds for family planning programs blocked the passage of the national budget. The impasse was resolved through a compromise. The use of foreign assistance for population activities was frozen pending an independent inquiry into the impact of population on economic development. A team of nine researchers prepared background papers on population and economic development, health, education, food supply, housing, poverty, the environment, family planning, and human rights. The overall conclusion of the inquiry was that slower population growth will yield more rapid development in most countries, especially in relatively poor, agricultural nations. The purpose of this contribution to the inquiry was to assess how population growth was affecting the housing sector and, in turn, economic development. Among other questions, does population growth increase the demand for residential land, housing, and urban infrastructure? Demographic methods were critical to answering the questions, especially assessing the impact of population growth on the demand for housing.     

Immigrant characteristics and Hispanic-Anglo housing inequality

This paper seeks to explain why Hispanic households in the United States live in housing markedly inferior to Anglos’. I argue that immigrant characteristics of Hispanic households and the metropolitan areas in which Hispanics live play important roles in determining such inequality in the housing market. Empirical analyses of homeownership, household crowding, and housing costs demonstrate that immigration plays a role in explaining relatively low homeownership and high household crowding for each of four large Hispanic populations (Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Cubans, and other Hispanics). The role of immigrant characteristics in determining housing costs is much weaker.     

Ethnic discrimination in the Greek housing market

This study employs a field experiment to assess the degree of discrimination against female Albanians in Greek housing markets. We divide rental housing into three categories by rent and designate the different levels of rent as working, middle, and upper classes. Albanians are significantly less likely to be asked to visit advertised rental housing in all the three categories, while rental penalties for Albanians are also significant. Interestingly, more discrimination was observed with higher-status rental properties. The outcomes suggest that the existence of isolated and racially segregated housing may be a result of prejudice and/or negative stereotypes against Albanians.     

Demographics and housing in America

Family-building needs of the "nesting" generation and its offspring, the baby boomers born 1947-1964, dominated post-World War 2 housing demand and production to 1970. Centered on tract-house suburbia, annual housing starts averaged 1.5 million a year in the 1950s and 1960s. With growing real median family incomes, the average size of new dwellings increased and 63% of households owned their homes by 1970, compared to 44% in 1940. The baby boomers' arrival at the ages of household formation sparked the "Golden Housing Age" of the 1970s. Net household increase averaged a record 1.7 million a year and 19 million year-round dwellings were added to the national inventory compared to 11 million in the 1950s and 1960s, despite a plunge in housing starts during the 1974-75 recession. Real median family income declined after 1973 and inflation escalated housing costs but at the same time fueled demand for housing as an investment hedge against inflation. The singles and "mingles" life styles of youthful baby boomers boosted rental housing, condominiums, and compact townhouses. Married-couple households dropped from 74% of the total in 1960 to 58% in 1975. Household formation and housing starts dropped drastically with the 1980-82 recession but bounced back as the economy recovered in 1983-85 and restrained inflation braked housing cost rises. Projections show overall household increases reduced to barely a million a year in 1990-95, with renter household gains at just 175,000, compared to 1/2 a million a year in the 1970s, as the household-formation ages of 18-34 are taken over by the baby bust generation. This will be offset by the baby boomers' maturing into middle age. By 1995 most of the giant generation will be in the peak-earning, high-homeownership ages of 35-54. Married-couple households in this age bracket will account for 56% of the household gain from 1983 to 1995, boosting national affluence and the demand for upscale housing, likely to be located in the suburbs.     

Assessment of neighborhood satisfaction by residents of three housing types

A highly influential but often underemphasized determinant of residential satisfaction is how residents perceive and feel about their neighborhoods. In this study, factors representing different aspects of residents' neighborhoods were identified and examined in relation to their overall assessment of their homes and neighborhoods. Relationships among neighborhood aspects and overall housing and neighborhood assessments were examined separately for residents of conventional homes, mobile homes, and apartments. Results based on all residents indicated that evaluations of neighborhood aspects were unrelated to housing satisfaction, but were moderately related to positive sentiments and satisfaction with the neighborhood. Separate analyses by housing type revealed that neighborhood perceptions of apartment residents were influential in affecting housing satisfaction. For all residents, the neighborhood's attractiveness and pleasant-friendliness were the most important determinants of neighborhood acceptance and satisfaction. The results also indicated that despite sharing similar determinant patterns of neighborhood acceptance with the other two housing type groups, the basis for mobile home residents' evaluations was considerably less related to the factors identified as influential. The findings indicated that different neighborhood factors formed the basis for differences in overall housing and neighborhood satisfaction among residents living in the three housing types. However, since the type of housing does not by itself define a neighborhood, the differences that were found need to be considered in the larger context of other components of a neighborhood like economic and community characteristics typically associated with a specific structure type.     

Measuring Ontario's increasing housing affordability problem

This empirical study measures the prevalence and incidence of housing affordability problems in Canada in 1972, 1976, and 1983. It shows the affordability problem has not been improved by the major effort the Canadian governments made during the 1970s. Rent controls have not been adequate in reducing affordability problems. Moderate intervention in the housing market are not enough to help low income households attain affordable housing. The problem's resolution may require a major effort to stimulate housing supply, and by direct government involvement, adjustment in creating new methods and institutions for building and delivering housing services. Housing affordability problems will remain unresolved in the absence of major income redistribution programs.     

Household structure and housing needs

This paper is mainly derived from the material presented in the preceding article by S. P. Brown. Indeed, while the previous analysis is of considerable intrinsic interest, the hypothetical population was constructed and its family distribution was shown for the purpose of providing a basis for estimates of housing needs. For several reasons it appeared to be essential to have such a basis. First, any housing programme has to take the future, as well as the present, distribution of households by type and size into account. Secondly, such a programme has to be designed so as not to prevent household formation—there should be dwellings for all potential households, so that involuntary doubling-up need not occur. Thirdly, most residential areas should have dwellings for an eventually stable population, that is, for one which has variety of age groups and of household types, and also fair stability of housing demand. Estimates of the distribution of potential ‘households’ could be derived from the ‘family’ distribution of the hypothetical population which reflects current demographic trends. Thus although this population is a ‘hypothetical’ one, it provides a realistic premise for considering housing needs, and because it is a ‘stationary’ one, it provides an especially suitable premise. Moreover, since the demographic characteristics of its ‘families’ and therefore of its potential households were established in far greater detail than has ever been the case in sample surveys of existing households, it was possible to classify households in the terms which appear to be most appropriate for the first draft of a housing programme, irrespective of social and economic variations in demand.

The first stage in following up Mr Brown's analysis was the conversion of ‘families’ into ‘households’. Two examples of the possible household distribution of the hypothetical population are presented. Example A, which gives a realistic, but not extreme, picture of the conversion of families into households, is used for the subsequent detailed analysis, while broader figures for distribution B are also included.

In the second stage the various types of household had to be distinguished. For estimating housing needs, two interrelated criteria of household classification are relevant—first, the stage in the life of a household, especially appropriate in considering space requirements; secondly, the age composition of households, which largely determines the type of dwelling needed.

The detailed distribution of households by size and type, based on this classification, is further translated into a distribution of dwellings by type and size. For this purpose, additional assumptions about the number of rooms and the type of dwelling needed by households of various types are introduced and applied to the hypothetical population, both to household distributions A and B. These assumptions are not based on accepted standards, nor do they suggest standards. They are merely used for the purpose of illustrating a possible method of estimating housing needs on the basis of a detailed picture of household structure. They are further designed to represent one possible compromise between economy in dwelling distribution, on the one hand, and flexibility of space for individual households, on the other.

In the final sections of the paper, the implications of the dwelling distributions here presented are discussed in relation to household mobility, and also with reference to the necessity for reconciling short-term and long-term housing needs in any housing programme.     

A cohort-based indicator of housing progress

Measuring housing quality has continued to be an elusive task. This article proposes a new social indicator of housing quality that builds on three conceptual decisions. The first step is to define an indicator that measures quality with reference to a standard that households are striving to attain. Single-family homeownership is a standard of housing sought by nine-tenths of Americans under age 45. A second decision is to measure quality not according to absolute attainment of this standard, but rather with reference to the aggregate experience of progress toward attaining the standard. Under this experiential definition, quality is assumed to be high when the average individual moves quickly toward homeownership. The third conceptual decision is to aggregate individuals' progress toward homeownership by measuring the trajectory of cohorts into homeownership. The indicator of housing progress is thus a vector of age-specific ownership rates. Twentieth-century cohorts are compared on this indicator and the implication of differences among them are discussed.Research underlying this article was supported by a Charles Abrams Fellowship awarded by the MIT-Harvard Joint Center for Urban Studies. This article is a revision of a paper presented at the 1981 Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, Washington D.C.     

Variance estimation for the 2006 French housing survey

In the 2006 French housing survey, information is collected on many aspects of housing to describe the housing stock in France and the housing conditions of French households. The basic national sample results from a multistage sampling design. Complementary samples were selected to perform accurate estimations for socio-demographic domains. Some French regions proceeded to a regional and local extension of the national sample. The variance is estimated for a region with a regional and local extension of the basic national sample.     

The relevance of social interactions on housing satisfaction

For most individuals, housing is the largest consumption and investment item of their lifetime and, as a result, housing satisfaction is an important component of their quality of life. The purpose of this paper then is to investigate the determinants of individual housing satisfaction as a particular domain of satisfaction with life as a whole, examining the effects of individual and household attributes (predictive), housing characteristics (hedonic), and more importantly, of social interactions originated in one's residential neighbourhood. To do so, we model housing as a composite commodity that satisfies dwelling needs, as well as other intangibles such as familiar relationships and socio-status aspects. We use the Survey of Living Conditions and Poverty (Spain). Specifically, using a self-reported measure of housing satisfaction, we estimate ordered probit models searching for the empirical specification that provides the best fit accounting for divergences driven by aspirations defined in the own household (internal norm), and by social comparisons (peer-effect or external norm).

Measuring housing quality in the absence of a monetized real estate market

Measuring housing quality or value or both has been a weak component of demographic and development research in less developed countries that lack an active real estate (housing) market. We describe a new method based on a standardized subjective rating process. It is designed to be used in settings that do not have an active, monetized housing market. The method is applied in an ongoing longitudinal study in north-east Thailand and could be straightforwardly used in many other settings. We develop a conceptual model of the process whereby households come to reside in high-quality or low-quality housing units. We use this theoretical model in conjunction with longitudinal data to show that the new method of measuring housing quality behaves as theoretically expected, thus providing evidence of face validity.     

Some social indicators for multiple family housing

This research suggests some social indicator candidates for families housed in multiple-family environments. Objective, subjective, and behavioral data sets are all represented in the analysis. This range of social statistics and the utilization of appropriate statistical analysis are viewed as necessary conditions for generating social indicators rather than simply relying on arbitrarily selected social statistics and assume they are indicators. Analysis of 1253 interviews in 88 Alberta subsidized housing projects reveals that subjective data from the tenant category of housing variables rank highest in accounting for present levels of user satisfaction and are viewed therefore as reasonable social indicators with respect to that issue.     

Mobility as a stratifying factor in housing: dwelling-in-place contra dwelling-on-the-move in Sweden

Housing is almost entirely overlooked in mobility studies. Yet mobility is intrinsically linked to housing, not only for the cybernetic elite or global nomads, but also for the middle class. Through a comparative case study of two extreme cases of housing, the Markeliushus from 1935 and Victoria Park from 2009, this study found that mobility has been continuously linked to discourses and practices of housing the modern Swede. Furthermore the findings suggest that two contrasting housing forms have evolved: dwelling-in-place and dwelling-on-the-move. I argue that these two housing forms are part of an evolving stratification of housing based on mobility. The article concludes that mobility has become an entry point for disaffiliation by privileged groups, accessible through housing.     

Propensity to adopt innovative housing: Development of knowledge indexes

The process by which energy efficient housing alternatives is diffused through society in relation to the information flow is relatively unknown. The major purpose of this study was to validate a continuum of the propensity to adopt alternative housing (passive and active solar, earth sheltered and retrofitted) based on knowledge level. Findings indicate knowledge indices are valid predictors of consumer acceptance of energy efficient housing alternatives. A greater level of knowledge was correlated with respondents willing to adopt an alternative housing type.     

Urban segregation in Sweden housing policy,housing markets,and the spacial distribution of households in metropolitan areas

The postwar Swedish housing standard has been raised considerably. But there were also unforeseen and undesired side effects in the form of increasing segregation. Between 1965–1975 a great number of rental apartments were built in the periphery of the metropolitan areas. They originally received an overrepresentation of the poor, immigrants, social welfare recipients, and members of the working class. Today these areas face long distances, increasing deterioration and the lower socioeconomic level of their population is accentuated. The following wave of rebuilding in the central metropolitan areas also reinforced residential segregation. As the dwellings became larger and totally modern, the rents rose. Ownership forms often changed to tenant-owned dwellings which drove up the prices of tenant-owned dwellings. The older working-class population was replaced by wealthy families with middle-class backgrounds. The rebuilding in the city centers has in all likelihood been the motor in the overall relocations and migrations of the metropolitan populations during the 1980s. The movement of the middle-class towards the centers corresponds to an increased concentration of workers and various resource-weak groups on the peripheries. This analysis uses a new large micro data base integrating Swedish census and level-of-living survey data on individuals, households and neighbourhoods.Housing segregation has not been seen as a very serious problem in Sweden. Attention has primarily been aimed at providing spatial and modern dwellings for everyone. The construction of housing was explosive through the middle of the 1970s, and it has been supported by substantial general subsidies. Today, Sweden, together with Norway, has Europe's highest and most evenly distributed housing standard. Overcrowding and unmodern housing have for all practical purposes been abolished.     

Immigration and the low-cost housing crisis: The Los Angeles area's experience

Arrivals of new immigrants and the secondary migration of other immigrants to the Los Angeles area are estimated to be as many as 180,000 each year in the 1980s. The Southern California Association of Governments found three-quarters of the immigrants were low-income minorities who are more likely to live in overcrowded enclaves and pay disproportionately high rents. Other data suggest that immigrants—many of them undocumented and Hispanic—are both victims of and contributors to the housing crisis.Although aggravated by immigration, Los Angeles' low-cost housing ills stem from broader national, social and economic trends: gentrification and other commercial conversion of low-cost housing, stagnating federal housing aid, and diminished tax and loan incentives. Skyrocketing costs have dropped the rate of home ownership well below the national average, forcing more people to rent. Condominium conversions, costly safety regulations, rent controls and successful no-growth movements also have contributed to Los Angeles' housing crisis.